I agree with the Martin part. I’d imagine that the components came from a wide variety of sources. Yes, the floor is yours.
Man, I waited too long to read this thread… I actually knew this answer. My wife and I were debating on whether or not the thing was hidden by the vertical… I’m not even sure what we decided on 
Okay, let’s try this prototype on for size.
I think it was the only one built? It’s designation comes from the initials for the manufacturer, it’s designer and the wing area! 
S.M.— thingamajig 235?lol only serious part is the SMbit.
Cheers, Richie
Sorry Richie, it’s not a Savoia-Marchetti of any kind.
Another try?
Cha-Ching!
I’m slam dunking this one!
It’s the:
Aeronautica Umbra AUT.18
Yup, you got it trexx!
The AUT.18 was a prototype fighter aircraft developed in Italy by Aeronautica Umbra shortly before the outbreak of World War II. It was designed in 1934 by Ing Felice Trojani, who at that time was collaborating with Umberto Nobile on the Arctic flights of the airships Norge and Italia. The aircraft’s designation came from initials of the manufacturer, the surname of the designer, and the aircraft’s wing area (18 m²).
Whatcha got fer us?
Dang-darned Elegant bird!
Excellent facts you’ve posted to go along with your “lookie here” question! Good one.
OK… I’m thinking. I’m thinking… (for next question)
Before you attempt to answer what’s up next, let us all oogle the beauty. Remember… this is 1936!
Question:
What is that?---->
It’s the Piaggio P119. Gotta rename your pics, man.
D’ya have any idea how hard it is to come up with this stuff!!?? Consider yourself, 'cyber smacked-n-da-forehead!
Ohhh! Dirty RATS! (my best Yosemite Sam impression)
If I can be so bold to go again…!
What is this? --------->
And a nice profile shot---->
I am thining it either the Sabca S.47 or the Caproni Ca 335 Maestrale. The Sabca S.47 was based on the Caproni Ca 335 Maestrale, so they look alike.
I am going to say it’s the Sabca S.47.
RemcoGrob!
Correct.
“Caproni Ca 335”
AND BONUS POINTS TOO…! FOR YOU!
Knowing the two types and their similarity washes us all in the beaming light of your well-tuned, AIRPLANE oriented brain! GREAT JOB!
Let me explain how I know this one, I live in the Netherlands, Belgium is one of our neighbouring countries. That’s why I am not only intrested in dutch but also in belgian aviation history. And I have been reading about Dutch and Belgian aviation history since I was a little kid.
My question: the Fokker D.23 was a remarkable airplane, with an (almost) unique twin boom, push-pull configuration.
However, there was another late 1930’s fighter with the same configuration. Name that aircraft…
Are you allowed to look things up on the net or do you have to know them already?
I found some early '40s planes, a German, Soviet and an American–seems everyone dabbled in the idea sooner or later.
I won’t post em, since I dunno if it’s allowed yet 
I don’t know if there is a rule book but I think that looking things up is inevitable.
Just give an anwser, one plane at a time (not “it’s either…or…or maybe the… But it could also be the…”)
OK then, I’ll go for the Soviet since it’s the most interesting to me, and also had the earliest date
It’s first flight was in the beginning of 1940, so it musta been designed before then
I liked the fact that the vertical tail was in the middle of the horizontal, between the booms.
The SAM-13 is the correct anwser, design work on that one started in 1938.
So you can ask the next question.
I am curious to what other twin boom pusher-puller fighters you have found, I do not know any other ones.
The other german one was the Ju EF112 in 1942
The American was a false alarm, it ended up just being a pusher with a weird nose that made me think it was a spinner–one of the drawings or photo’s I saw had the retractable nose pushed in so there was a definite seam there. Interesting trivia about this plane is that it was the first plane to have an ejector seat, but it shot the pilot down not up. Also, the Japanese supposedly had a similar design to this one, but never got to fly it.
Here’s a modern jet question: I’m told this is unique to the JSF but it might have happened on another, older jet. What is special about the engine installation of the future JSF/F-35, and as a bonus, why did the designers do this?
I’m a little attached to the plane since I got the chance to help design a few frame stations and fuel floors, as well as being able to see the first flight of the A variant 
Is it the powerplant’s Integrated Power Package, which features a turbine driven starter / genarator which after being spun up for starting, switches over to a generator?
If this is correct, the reason is for reduced weight, increased reliability & to maximise “packaging” - it is also required to sustain the considerable electrical demand that the F-35 will have.
